-
-
Rank：Diamond Member
- Score：1787
- Posts：1787
-
From：Canada
- Register：11/07/2008 1:17 AM
|
Date Posted：03/26/2010 1:19 PMCopy HTML
View unanswered posts | View active topics View new posts | View your posts | Author | Message |
|---|
| ShuBob | Post subject: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY?  Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:34 pm |
| | Moderator |  |
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 2754 | | | Top | |  |
| harmony | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:41 pm |
|
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 12:05 am
Posts: 679 | | | Top | | |
| ShuBob | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:54 pm |
| | Moderator | |
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 2754 | Roy, will you be otherwise engaged on Thursday? Will you be dedicating several of your blog enteries to Murat's settlement like you did with the McCanns?
|
| | Top | | |
| Roasted Arizona | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:57 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:43 pm
Posts: 107 | Who is Roy Greenslade? :???:
|
| | Top | | |
| ShuBob | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:58 pm |
| | Moderator | |
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 2754 | | | Top | | |
| Roasted Arizona | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:02 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:43 pm
Posts: 107 | | | Top | | |
| JillyComeLately | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:03 pm |
| | Lifer |  |
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:39 pm
Posts: 5366 | .
Totally off-topic, sorry Shubob but your new avatar is too funny =))
Love it!
|
| | Top | | |
| Strataflorida | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:38 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:18 pm
Posts: 28 | <!-- m --> http://web.archive.org/web/20080723040925/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7507357.stm<!-- m --> Updated at 13:58 BST: Media commentator and journalism professor Roy Greenslade said the case showed newspapers had "lost their heads" over the Madeleine story.
He said newspapers needed to be more aware that when crimes happened abroad it did not "relieve them of the normal rules that they should apply".
He added that competition had driven them to "bid each other up" in terms of what they thought they could get away with in their reporting.
"Profits and sales ruled, rather than principles and ethics," he said.
|
| | Top | | |
| ShuBob | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:30 pm |
| | Moderator | |
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 2754 | JillyComeLately wrote: .
Totally off-topic, sorry Shubob but your new avatar is too funny =))
Love it! Thanks to pantsof ganga ;;)
|
| | Top | | |
| ShuBob | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:32 pm |
| | Moderator | |
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 2754 | Strataflorida wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7507357.stm
Updated at 13:58 BST:
Media commentator and journalism professor Roy Greenslade said the case showed newspapers had "lost their heads" over the Madeleine story.
He said newspapers needed to be more aware that when crimes happened abroad it did not "relieve them of the normal rules that they should apply".
He added that competition had driven them to "bid each other up" in terms of what they thought they could get away with in their reporting.
"Profits and sales ruled, rather than principles and ethics," he said. Thanks Strataflorida :) That was quick, Roy. Will you be following this up by appearing in court on Thursday and giving interviews from there?
|
| | Top | | |
| CaboFrio | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:33 pm |
| | Hardened Criminal |  |
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:58 am
Posts: 1945 | Roasted Arizona wrote: Who is Roy Greenslade? :???: He's the bloke Henry Vlll wrote the song about.
|
| | Top | | |
| Valleyman | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:04 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 9:28 pm
Posts: 188
Location: Wales | Of course, Roy will be be there. His eyes are already lighting up with the pound signs at the thought of all the fees that he is going to collect from media friends in return for his 'expert' (unbiased) opinion on the proceedings. Another mercenary media vulture looking for easy pickings.
|
| | Top | | |
| ShuBob | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:29 pm |
| | Moderator | |
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 2754 | Valleyman wrote: Of course, Roy will be be there. His eyes are already lighting up with the pound signs at the thought of all the fees that he is going to collect from media friends in return for his 'expert' (unbiased) opinion on the proceedings. Another mercenary media vulture looking for easy pickings. They are all vultures but unlike Clarrie they don't brag about it!
|
| | Top | | |
| ShuBob | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:26 pm |
| | Moderator | |
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 2754 | Roy has spoken....... Quote: Why papers are paying out to Murat
July 15, 2008 4:58 PM
The Robert Murat libel settlement is hardly a surprise. Newspapers did overstep the mark in their reporting and, given the award to the McCanns in March, the outcome was entirely predictable.
The reason for the capitulation of 11 newspapers before the case reached court is very clear. All have very expensive legal teams and were advised by their separate batteries of lawyers that they had no hope of winning. Indeed, they might well have ended up paying out much more in terms of legal fees and, more tentatively, might also have suffered from a loss of credibility among their audiences too (not that the credibility of most of the 11 is too high anyway).
The facts of the matter are unarguable. Murat was libelled. Not once, but many times over. Scores of reports, and many headlines too, defamed him. Like Kate and Gerry McCann, he was often treated not as a suspect by papers but as a culprit.
But these papers know the rules, don't they? So why did they get it so wrong? How did they fall into the trap of publishing so many wild and inaccurate stories in the aftermath of Madeleine McCann's disappearance?
I think there are three clear reasons. First, it happened abroad. Editors and reporters appeared to think that the overriding rule - the one based on that long-held British judicial precedent that regards everyone as innocent until proven guilty - was no longer relevant because it was a Portuguese case. They thought they could get away with virtually anything, in terms of both contempt and libel.
Second, the level of competition among all these newspapers meant that they outbid each other in an attempt to attract readers by printing ever more lurid (and false) allegations against the people supposedly connected to the girl's disappearance. Many of the stories, culled from anonymous sources (and, quite possibly, no sources at all) were utterly irresponsible and, most certainly, unprovable.
Papers were also competing against 24-hour news on TV and radio. Therefore they felt under pressure to get new angles on a story which has only ever had a couple of facts: a child vanished; the police named one man as a suspect - on the thinnest of evidence; the police later named the McCanns as suspects. Everything else was speculation.
Third, and this goes to the heart of the problem, these papers have been pushing at the boundaries of the British contempt rule for years. More is published about British crime suspects in advance of their being charged (and sometimes afterwards) than was ever the case 20 years ago. Why? Because they have got away with it. In only very rare cases have papers suffered for breaking the rules.
Some judges have asked attorney-generals to take a look at certain cases, but nothing has come of it. The papers, standing by their claim to act in the greater public interest, have gradually begun to publish clearly prejudicial material prior to trials.
Will the McCann and Murat cases give them pause for thought? I doubt that they will worry about contempt, believing they have already won their argument. As for libel, the punishment on this occasion is relatively small compared to the rewards of adding to, or maintaining, readerships in a period of prolonged sales decline.
The total payout, supposedly £550,000 between some but not all of the 11 papers, may seem like a small price to pay in order to continue their lawless activities while, of course, telling their readers that politicians are responsible for the (allegedly) awful state of law and order in Britain.
<!-- m --> http://web.archive.org/web/20080723040925/http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/greenslade/2008/07/why_papers_must_pay_out_to_mur.html<!-- m --> ............but I wonder if he'll follow this up by being in Court on Thursday :-w
|
| | Top | | |
| Pogacsa | Post subject: Re: Roy Greenslade, WILL YOU BE AT THE HIGH COURT ON THURSDAY? Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:33 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 5:27 pm
Posts: 180 | Roy Greenslade is not my favourite person but I do think this is a good article. Rather better than the ones he has produced about the McCann libel case.
|
| | Top | | |
|
|
FAQ
Search
